Evaluation of sleep quality and risk of obstructive sleep apnea in patients referred for aesthetic rhinoplasty.

IMPORTANCE: Aesthetic rhinoplasty is the fifth surgical procedure most performed worldwide by plastic surgeons. With the growing demand for rhinoplasty, there is an unmet need for research into the profile of patients who seek aesthetic nasal surgery in an attempt to improve not only cosmetic dissatisfactions, but also the manifestations of other, possibly interrelated disorders, especially sleep disturbances. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the sleep quality and the risk of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in patients referred for aesthetic rhinoplasty, as well as the association of these conditions with nasal symptoms. Design: Cross-sectional study performed at the period of June/2016 to August/2017. Setting: Department of Otolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery - Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Participants: Patients of both sexes, aged 18 to 65 years, who were referred for aesthetic rhinoplasty. We evaluated 46 patients, two of whom were excluded because they were outside the inclusion age criteria. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s): Anterior rhinoscopy and the following validated surveys were used. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; Epworth Sleepiness Scale; Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale; Berlin Questionnaire. The visual analog scale for snoring was also used. RESULTS: Of the 44 participants, 18 (41%) were males and 26 (59%) were females. 82% had poor sleep quality. 46% presented excessive daytime sleepiness. There was a high risk for Obstructive Sleep Apnea in 27%. Regarding to nasal symptoms, the mean score in the Nasal Obstructive Symptoms Evaluation was 66.25±25.38. When comparing the groups with good and poor sleep quality, we observed a higher risk for Obstructive Sleep Apnea (p=0.05) in patients with poor sleep quality. Patients at high risk for Obstructive Sleep Apnea had higher scores on the Nasal Obstructive Symptoms Evaluation (p=0.001) and on the analogue snoring scale (p<0.001) compared to patients at low risk. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a high occurrence of poor sleep quality in participants. All participants who were at high risk for obstructive sleep apnea were also classified as having poor sleep quality. An association was also observed between the presence of high risk for obstructive sleep apnea and presence of nasal symptoms.

Efficacy of syringe-irrigation topical therapy and the influence of the middle turbinate in sinus penetration of solutions / Eficácia da terapia tópica de irrigação com seringa e a influência da concha média na penetração sinusal de soluções

Abstract Introduction: Topical therapies are the best postoperative treatment option for chronic rhinosinusitis, especially those with high volume and pressure, such as the squeeze bottles. However, they are not an available option in Brazil, where irrigation syringes are used. Objective: To investigate the efficacy of topical sinonasal therapy with syringe and the influence of the middle turbinate on this process Methods: Intervention study in training models (S.I.M.O.N.T.). After standard dissection, three interventions were performed (Nasal Spray 4 puffs, 60-mL syringe and 240-mL Squeeze Bottle) with normal and Sutured Middle Turbinate. Images of each sinus were captured after the interventions, totalizing 144 images. The images were classified by 10 evaluators according to the amount of residual volume from zero to 3, with zero and 1 being considered poor penetration and 2 and 3, good penetration. The 1440 evaluations were used in this study. Results: Considering all middle turbinate situations, the amount of good penetrations were 8.1% for Spray; 68.3% for Syringe, and 78.3% for Squeeze (p < 0.0001). Considering all types of interventions, the Normal Middle Turbinate group had 48.2% of good penetrations and the Sutured Middle Turbinate, 55% (p = 0.01). Considering only the Sutured Middle Turbinates, there was no difference between the interventions with Syringe and Squeeze (76.3% vs. 80.4%; p = 0.27). Conclusion: Topical therapy of irrigation with a 60-mL syringe was more effective than that with nasal spray. The status of the middle turbinate proved to be fundamental and influenced topical therapy. Irrigation with syringe was as effective as the squeeze bottle when the middle turbinate was sutured to the nasal septum.

Resumo Introdução: Terapias tópicas são a melhor opção de tratamento pós-operatório da rinossinusite crônica, principalmente com alto volume e pressão, como os squeeze bottles. Porém, não são opções disponíveis na realidade brasileira, na qual frequentemente são usados seringas para a irrigação. Objetivo: Averiguar a eficácia da terapia tópica nasossinusal com seringa e a influência da concha média nesse processo. Método: Estudo de intervenção em modelos de treinamento (S.I.M.O.N.T.). Após dissecção padronizada, três intervenções foram feitas (spray nasal 4 puffs, seringa de 60 mL e squeeze bottle de 240 mL) com a concha média normal e suturada. Foram capturadas imagens de cada seio após as intervenções, totalizando 144 imagens. As imagens foram classificadas por 10 avaliadores de acordo com a quantidade de volume residual de zero a 3, sendo zero e 1 considerados penetração ruim e 2 e 3, penetração boa. As 1.440 avaliações foram utilizadas neste estudo. Resultados: Considerando todas as situações de concha média, a quantidade de penetrações boas foi de 8,1% para spray; 68,3% para seringa e 78,3% para squeeze (p < 0,0001). Considerando todos os tipos de intervenção, a concha média normal obteve 48,2% de penetrações boas e a concha média suturada, 55% (p = 0,01). Considerando apenas concha média suturada, não houve diferença entre as intervenções seringa e squeeze (76,3% vs. 80,4%; p = 0,27). Conclusão: A terapia tópica de irrigação com seringa de 60 mL foi mais eficaz do que com spray nasal. O status da concha média mostrou-se fundamental e influenciou a terapia tópica. A irrigação com seringa foi tão eficaz quanto a com squeeze bottle quando a concha média foi suturada ao septo nasal.

Efficacy of syringe-irrigation topical therapy and the influence of the middle turbinate in sinus penetration of solutions.

INTRODUCTION: Topical therapies are the best postoperative treatment option for chronic rhinosinusitis, especially those with high volume and pressure, such as the squeeze bottles. However, they are not an available option in Brazil, where irrigation syringes are used. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of topical sinonasal therapy with syringe and the influence of the middle turbinate on this process METHODS: Intervention study in training models (S.I.M.O.N.T.). After standard dissection, three interventions were performed (Nasal Spray 4 puffs, 60-mL syringe and 240-mL Squeeze Bottle) with normal and Sutured Middle Turbinate. Images of each sinus were captured after the interventions, totalizing 144 images. The images were classified by 10 evaluators according to the amount of residual volume from zero to 3, with zero and 1 being considered poor penetration and 2 and 3, good penetration. The 1440 evaluations were used in this study. RESULTS: Considering all middle turbinate situations, the amount of good penetrations were 8.1% for Spray; 68.3% for Syringe, and 78.3% for Squeeze (p<0.0001). Considering all types of interventions, the Normal Middle Turbinate group had 48.2% of good penetrations and the Sutured Middle Turbinate, 55% (p=0.01). Considering only the Sutured Middle Turbinates, there was no difference between the interventions with Syringe and Squeeze (76.3% vs. 80.4%; p=0.27). CONCLUSION: Topical therapy of irrigation with a 60-mL syringe was more effective than that with nasal spray. The status of the middle turbinate proved to be fundamental and influenced topical therapy. Irrigation with syringe was as effective as the squeeze bottle when the middle turbinate was sutured to the nasal septum.